Yeah, and nobody needs a car that can do 0-100 Kph in 4 seconds either. Not to mention that nobody needs a car that can cruise at 250 Kph.
But they sell anyway, and unneeded features in office software are a world cheaper than hot cars. Hell, MSOfice is cheaper than the monthly insurance on hot cars, and you have a much better chance of talking $EMPLOYER into paying for MSOffice than for a Ferrari.
"Microsoft: You are banned from selling any software in Europe for the next three years"
Why bother?
Keep in mind that Microsoft's whole business is built on priveleges granted by the State. If Microsoft refuses to accept the authority of the State, the State can in turn refuse Microsoft recourse to the courts.
Put another way, the EU could declare Microsoft's copyrights unenforcable. Care to guess what that would do to the bottom line?
As part of the New! Improved! switch to all-digital television, Congress is going to spend several billion on subsidizing replacements for outdated TVs in the USA. [1]
Anyone care to bet that the money from selling bandwidth (which was the original reason for the push) is more than consumed by the subsidy to Asian electronics companies and the MPAA?
[1] No, I'm not fool enough to think that anyone but Congress will get new 52" HDTVs out of this.
My guess is IBM may have recently come by some new info, probably from some insider and probably in the form of some smoking gun documents.
Two reasons:
In late December, the Court ordered SCOX to turn over a few thousand documents that they had been claiming were priveleged. The privelege claims were pretty thin, but they fought hard for them. "Smoking guns" isn't too bold a conclusion.
The "what are we accusing you of" phase of discovery is now over, it's defense time. By waiting until it was too late to tip SCOX off on defensive strategies, IBM gains some (small?) tactical advantage.
Since corporations generally lack human emotional response, I can only assume there is good strategety and/or profit motivation. Anyone care to speculate?
It's good to be respected.
Fear is a reasonable substitute for respect.
Most of IBM's business depends on others trusting them with confidential information. SCOX, very publicly, impugned IBM's trustworthiness.
They will also have to appear in court later in March to give depositions.
Actually, the depositions will occur at law offices near the headquarters of the companies in question. Microsoft's, for instance, will occur in Seattle.
Tell that to Baen Books and their WebScriptions store. At least according to Eric Flint and Jim Baen, they're raking it in.
Oh -- they hate DRM and only distribute standard unencumbered formats. They have this quaint notion that if they treat their customers well, their customers will respect their copyrights.
ship millions of identical watermarked files, then expect hardware to refuse to play any that files that aren't licensed (same old business model, someone else's problem.)
Mark each file to identify the purchaser, then go after the source of widespread copyright violation?
The first is basically worse than DRM, the second is essentially an aid to enforcing existing copyright laws. I suspect that if the Content Cartel would finally accept that their business models need to change and go for the second approach, most of us could accept it.
On the grasping hand, they have a tax on computers "capable of receiving live or virtually live broadcasts" which they propose to apply to my Linux comptuter. On the other hand, they have DMCA-type laws which make it illegal for me to receive, play, or do much of anything relating to video content.
Why do I not expect "choose one" to get me either content or a tax exemption?
Will digital music distribution fall solely to giants like XM and iTunes?
It will if the RIAA has any say in the matter. The last thing they want is Internet radio. Consider that they pay broadcast radio to play songs but demand to be paid for the same songs going over the Internet.
We can speculate on why (greed doesn't explain it, since they don't stand to gain any revenue from strangling the baby.) My own guess is that Internet radio is cheap enough to run that independent artists might build listeners and escape from the RIAA plantation.
If I were prone to conspiracy theories, I might think that Dubya is really the guy behind the Mohammad cartoons and he did it because he knew that they would provoke Islam's PR machine, the militant fundamentalists, into exposing themselves as the hypocritical barbarians that they are in order to prepare Western sentiment for the use of nuclear weapons against Iran.
Bad people do bad things. It doesn't matter if they're Muslim, American or Buddist. I'll defend every muslim who doesn't participate in a riot and related actions until they're either all killed, or I die.
I'm quite willing to grant the practitioners of Islam the right to define for themselves what "Islam" is, just as Rabbis define Judaism, the Church defines Roman Catholic Christianity, etc.
So, how is it that the when one of your "bad people" tells the world that Islam stands for violence there isn't a corresponding rebuttal from the mainstream of Islam?
I wonder what's going on here? It sounds too much like the "spontaneous demonstrations" that have been happening the last several days. Someone is playing a calculated game here, and it's not only unclear what they're up and who's the prime mover; it's not clear which "side" is stirring the pot [1].
Well, time to start the popcorn since I can't do much but watch.
[1] Don't worry -- I won't let the tinfoil hat mess up the microwave popcorn.
First, Linux users are used to free (beer) software. There are a few money-makers running on Linux, but for the most part the software doesn't cost anything except maybe the occasional Paypal donation. Secondly, Linux users are used to Free (speech) software. If the software is not licensed under the GPL (or a GPL-compatible license) there will be hell to pay.
Well, I suppose if you say so.
Now, if you'll pardon me I have to get back to my Linux desktop. My simulation run on HSPICE ($40,000/seat license) just finished and I need to update the schematics on Virtuoso ($ame general ballpark) so the layout engineer can update it on his Linux/Cadence workstation (IIRC somewhere north of $100,000/seat) before shipping it out.
Slashdot Mirror
But they sell anyway, and unneeded features in office software are a world cheaper than hot cars. Hell, MSOfice is cheaper than the monthly insurance on hot cars, and you have a much better chance of talking $EMPLOYER into paying for MSOffice than for a Ferrari.
Well, MS is true to their traditions at least: why document interfaces when you can just plug snips of code in across the product lines?
Why bother?
Keep in mind that Microsoft's whole business is built on priveleges granted by the State. If Microsoft refuses to accept the authority of the State, the State can in turn refuse Microsoft recourse to the courts.
Put another way, the EU could declare Microsoft's copyrights unenforcable. Care to guess what that would do to the bottom line?
Conclusion: go for it.
Anyone care to bet that the money from selling bandwidth (which was the original reason for the push) is more than consumed by the subsidy to Asian electronics companies and the MPAA?
[1] No, I'm not fool enough to think that anyone but Congress will get new 52" HDTVs out of this.
FWIW, my GrokLaw handle is the same as my /. one.
Two reasons:
Assign whatever weights you like.
Actually, the depositions will occur at law offices near the headquarters of the companies in question. Microsoft's, for instance, will occur in Seattle.
Oh -- they hate DRM and only distribute standard unencumbered formats. They have this quaint notion that if they treat their customers well, their customers will respect their copyrights.
Are they planning to
The first is basically worse than DRM, the second is essentially an aid to enforcing existing copyright laws. I suspect that if the Content Cartel would finally accept that their business models need to change and go for the second approach, most of us could accept it.
Although, that DEC PDP-8 was pretty sweet at the time.
Why do I not expect "choose one" to get me either content or a tax exemption?
This is /. you insensitive clod!
It will if the RIAA has any say in the matter. The last thing they want is Internet radio. Consider that they pay broadcast radio to play songs but demand to be paid for the same songs going over the Internet.
We can speculate on why (greed doesn't explain it, since they don't stand to gain any revenue from strangling the baby.) My own guess is that Internet radio is cheap enough to run that independent artists might build listeners and escape from the RIAA plantation.
Add another generation. The kids have each begged me to get them the SFBC omnibus Doc Smith sets.
Exactly. Do you like yours buttered?
Christ what a design! I could eat a handful of iron filings and PUKE a better emergency pump than that!"
Hey, credit the author. E. E. Smith, "First Lensman."
That, or the parent is very subtle sarcasm.
Wife? This is /. you insensitive clod!
I'm quite willing to grant the practitioners of Islam the right to define for themselves what "Islam" is, just as Rabbis define Judaism, the Church defines Roman Catholic Christianity, etc.
So, how is it that the when one of your "bad people" tells the world that Islam stands for violence there isn't a corresponding rebuttal from the mainstream of Islam?
Well, time to start the popcorn since I can't do much but watch. [1] Don't worry -- I won't let the tinfoil hat mess up the microwave popcorn.
The nice thing about being an honest guy like Quinn is that the crooks never believe you.
If nothing else, cartooneys are good for plenty of laughs.
Well, I suppose if you say so.
Now, if you'll pardon me I have to get back to my Linux desktop. My simulation run on HSPICE ($40,000/seat license) just finished and I need to update the schematics on Virtuoso ($ame general ballpark) so the layout engineer can update it on his Linux/Cadence workstation (IIRC somewhere north of $100,000/seat) before shipping it out.